|
Two scenarios a month is Paizo's current output. Doubling output is a little much to expect. I rather like the storyline format - maybe that's because I pretty much have gotten to play them in order as intended this season (they are offered at one of the monthly game days as they come out).
I beg to differ that the time commitment for Thornkeep or modules (I'll give you APs - though a few of the sanctioned portions ARE doable in either a double slot) is too much. I've run several Saturday game days where a module was run over two slots. Many of the Thornkeep levels are doable in an extended single slot (6 hours, sometimes less).
Suggest to your local coordinator that these types of things be put on the schedule. Or better yet, offer to run or organize them yourself! Get involved if you want to see things you haven't played get on the schedule!
I've been organizing a store for over a year (almost a year and a half), and I just don't see these problems with "running out of scenarios" that everyone claims. Am I doing it wrong? I coordinate 4 slots a month, with a mix of old and new players and old and new scenarios, and I am usually able to fill tables of the scenarios I am offering. Sometimes there's nothing available for the older players to play, so they judge for the newer players instead. There's two people in my regular group that literally have played all or nearly all the scenarios but they continue to spread the awesome by judging. Sometimes to reward them I run a module that they haven't played on a Saturday where I can spread it across two slots (but it's getting harder because they are starting to run out of those too! Guess its time to think about APs). Besides a few other players that have been playing from the beginning, I just don't see many people running out of things to play (and this is with a minimum of 6 games available a month in the area, not counting conventions and a short lived game day at a third store). Granted there may be areas where there are more games available and people are running out of things sooner... maybe they should slow down a little or start judging?
|
What is interesting in that in the scheme of Living campaigns, perhaps people are playing Pathfinder society more because there is no comparable living game to play alongside it. I havnt heard anything about LFR for a long time (not even sure its still going) but in the past Pathfinder Society has run alongside other Living campaigns such as Living Arcanis and Living Greyhawk (and to an extent LFR).
Society seems to be the only one still pumping.
Katie: heh, I like the 'Slow Down' bit you mentioned, although Im not sure some people are capable of doing that :)
|
More than anything I'd like to see more scenarios, but I just don't see that as realistic at this time.Which is why AP's were sanctioned. The current schedule releases two scenarios and an AP each month. A module is released every other.
The excised portions of an AP take roughly twenty hours to play through. The old format for modules was nine to twelve hours of gameplay per 32 page book. With the new format being 64 pages, I'm guessing it will be more like twenty hours per module.
This means that the current schedule is releasing around forty hours of brand new, sanctioned game play per month. That seems like quite a bit.
Will, just a couple of notes on your module comments.
The new module schedule is once every three months, not bi-monthly. As you mentioned, the new modules will be 64 pages long instead of 32.
What you may not have noticed, since you didn't mention it, is that from what has been published on the first two of th enew modules, and it sounded like it was going to be the plan for the future 64 page modules, was taht they are no longer being designed for PCs at X level, gaining 1 level during the module, and facing the final boss at level X+1. The new plan appears to be having the modules cover 4-6 levels of play. One of them is designed for taking PCs from 1st lebvel all the way to 6th or 7th, and the other was for 12th level PCs winding up at 16th or 17th. No way that can all be sanctioned for a single session.
My suspicion or belief, if you will, is that these 64 page modules will have sanctioning handled in much the same way as the APs are, where only aspecific portion of the module gets sanctioned. Depending on how they are written, since they cover so many levels of play, they might wind up with two sanctioned sections, which would help more with people needing additional play opportunities than just a single section being sanctioned would.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I havnt heard anything about LFR for a long time (not even sure its still going) but in the past Pathfinder Society has run alongside other Living campaigns such as Living Arcanis and Living Greyhawk (and to an extent LFR).
Society seems to be the only one still pumping.
LFR is still going, with new adventures coming out on at least a semi-regular basis. There'll be five new adventures (plus a Battle Interactive) at Origins next month, though it's been a matter of no small angst that there won't be any LFR at GenCon in August (WotC has chosen to focus on "playtests" of Next). OTOH, there've been no updates to campaign documents in two years (and those last updates still have "draft" affixed to them). In some areas, LFR play is still going fairly strongly, but in others, it's dwindled, sometimes to nothing.
Living Arcanis (now called Legends of Arcanis) is also continuing, though, as you almost always see with a smaller OP campaign, its appeal is often rather regional -- you may find a lot of players in one city, and none in another.
There are a number of other, smaller OP campaigns which are also out there, including Heroes of Rokugan, Shadowrun Missions, Fellowship of the White Star, Legends of the Shining Jewel, etc., but none of them are nearly on the scale of either PFS or LFR.
|
Start judging and slow down aren't exactly options for me. I already judge 2-3 tables a week, and I can't realistically slow down because people want to play and I want to provide space / opportunities for them to play.
You asked "am I doing it wrong" I don't think so, unless your players seem frustrated that they can't play more.
You also said slow down, or judge. I have 74 table credits most if them in the last 6 months, I think I'm putting in fair work on the judging side. Should I slow down? I have 3 tables over two days every week, and in addition to those are game days every Saturday in the area, which rotate through the supporting stores.
Am I doing it wrong? What I need to provide for my players are more scenarios. One of those 3 tables/week has been a module, and will be sanctioned portions of adventure paths. With 2-4 tables at our local game days, and 2 tables every Wednesday at my store, we burn through some scenarios.
Sorry of you didn't mean to imply that people playing a lot is bad, if I misinterpreted it that way, well that's the Internet for ya :)
|
|
I dont think playing a lot is bad, but i think It can lead to burnout and disillusionment with gaming. Ill be honest though, I do think Judging 2-3 tables a week is a lot. Thats probably another 2 hours of prep time on top of the hours spent running the game (apologies if prep time varies).
I understand that people want to play, but they also have to understand that it cant just all fall on one person. From what I am reading above, Benrislove you own a gaming store? (cool if so!), so I can see that in your case you are running the tables to pull people in. Thats a logical and sensible thing to do.
Thanks for the information Mike on LFR and Legends of Arcanis ( I know a bit more about the latter). Im not sure either has any local representation sadly.
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
I have regular games of each of Living Forgotten Realms, Legends of Arcanis, Savage Worlds, and Shadowrun Missions in my store (and PFS, of course). until recently I had semi-regular attendance for D&D Encounters, and I have seen the occasional game of the NeoExodus orgplay game.
For non-organized play there are 2 different Adventure Path groups, a group playing Fantasy Flight's Warhammer Fantasy RPG, a group playing Age of Wurms from 2nd Edition AD&D, 2 more groups of Savage Worlds, a Shadowrun campaign, and a recent start-up group of Fantasy Flight's Star Wars Edge of the Empire RPG.
There are A LOT of options. Not trying to find people who will run those things is doing those games a disservice. All you need is someone who expresses interest, and you can get nearly anything up and running. Players are always willing.
As for Benrislove: I'm on Matthew's side - 2 to 3 sessions a week is too much. I have five different time slots that I run PFS in my store during the month (I usually run four tables at each time slot). I make it a point to GM twice per month, and play twice per month. This keeps me from burning out, and keeps the faces behind the GM screen fresh for everyone. It has created a very deep pool of GMs, and we never have issues finding people who will step up and take a table (meaning I never have to cancel one if/when a GM has to back out for whatever reason).
Also, by GMing twice per month and playing twice per month, I am exactly pacing the release schedule for PFS scenarios. Yes, occasionally I get in an extra slot of GMing or playing, and that "catches me up" on older scenarios that I have missed, but I am in no way in danger of running out of available options to play. Likewise, due to how I schedule the events in my store, my player base also does not have that problem, though they have plenty of opportunity to play.
|
|
There is an avenue for volunteer authors via the Open Call. People can submit a short 1 hour Quest designed for PFS play. If it is an adventure that Paizo could use they will work with the author to produce it.
|
|
But, again, if someone is outpacing the PFS publications, and complaining about wanting new characters, why can't they make new characters for a non-society game with the people they're playing so much with, and just sidebar? *shrugs*
Because the problem is people that have finished everything they can do in Society play and still want to keep playing in Society. Saying 'play non-Society' doesn't really solve their problem. :)
|
|
I have regular games of each of Living Forgotten Realms, Legends of Arcanis, Savage Worlds, and Shadowrun Missions in my store (and PFS, of course). until recently I had semi-regular attendance for D&D Encounters, and I have seen the occasional game of the NeoExodus orgplay game.
For non-organized play there are 2 different Adventure Path groups, a group playing Fantasy Flight's Warhammer Fantasy RPG, a group playing Age of Wurms from 2nd Edition AD&D, 2 more groups of Savage Worlds, a Shadowrun campaign, and a recent start-up group of Fantasy Flight's Star Wars Edge of the Empire RPG.
There are A LOT of options. Not trying to find people who will run those things is doing those games a disservice. All you need is someone who expresses interest, and you can get nearly anything up and running. Players are always willing.
As for Benrislove: I'm on Matthew's side - 2 to 3 sessions a week is too much. I have five different time slots that I run PFS in my store during the month (I usually run four tables at each time slot). I make it a point to GM twice per month, and play twice per month. This keeps me from burning out, and keeps the faces behind the GM screen fresh for everyone. It has created a very deep pool of GMs, and we never have issues finding people who will step up and take a table (meaning I never have to cancel one if/when a GM has to back out for whatever reason).
Also, by GMing twice per month and playing twice per month, I am exactly pacing the release schedule for PFS scenarios. Yes, occasionally I get in an extra slot of GMing or playing, and that "catches me up" on older scenarios that I have missed, but I am in no way in danger of running out of available options to play. Likewise, due to how I schedule the events in my store, my player base also does not have that problem, though they have plenty of opportunity to play.
I don't have a lot of interest in other RPG Organized play campaigns at my store, I'd love to spread it out amongst all those other things, but that isn't really any option for me at this time.
I'll say it's probably somewhat excessive, and I am fully aware that I'm the minority, we host 3 tables over 2 days every week, and our VC hosts every Saturday. I try NOT to run current season stuff on Wednesday's, so as to push the "game day" events and drive attendance there.
Originally I planned for Wednesday's twice a month, 1 table each, but my player's wanted to play more so I now have two tables weekly. I try to play at 2-3 game days a month, and I GM the one at my store. I also GM every wednesday. the Monday group is more about exploring other PFS sanctioned material, if we were planning on using a lot of scenario's for it, I would have likely veto'd the idea.
PFS, is the only RPG OP campaign I have been very involved in. My dealings with RPGA were primarily encounters, and that was pretty early on in 4th edition.
Admittedly my store's focus is much more on TCGs so I haven't personally put a lot of effort into building RPG-OP groups, aside from PFS (still new at this) That being said, with ~3500 sq ft' of play space I can have 2 tables of PFS, a YGO tournament, 3-4 other RPG groups, and 40k players while still having tables to spare.
I don't think Paizo should meet the demand that my groups create, I do think they could release 4 scenario's a month. Weekly Game Days in an area is a fairly reasonable expectation, and I don't think it's an unfair thing to ask for being offered.
Still though, I would argue that more people playing more is better assuming it's not crowding out other games from table space.
|
More and More people are posting that they are running out of scenarios.
How many people though? I just generated some new PFS numbers to hand out at a convention at the weekend; they're nearly up to 90,000. I suspect the number of people who have played nearly everything are a tiny, tiny proportion.
I mean, I consider myself a fairly hardcore Pathfinder player, and I'm still a long, long way from running out.
|
There is an avenue for volunteer authors via the Open Call. People can submit a short 1 hour Quest designed for PFS play. If it is an adventure that Paizo could use they will work with the author to produce it.
My understanding of that is it hasn't been taken advantage of by Paizo; it's been in place for years and there's been no Quests out.
Anyone know if I'm wrong?
|
|
There is an avenue for volunteer authors via the Open Call. People can submit a short 1 hour Quest designed for PFS play. If it is an adventure that Paizo could use they will work with the author to produce it.My understanding of that is it hasn't been taken advantage of by Paizo; it's been in place for years and there's been no Quests out.
Anyone know if I'm wrong?
Shortly after they reintroduced the Open Call, their method for releasing Quests died (Kobold Quarterly). They haven't found a good place to rerelease them.
|
|
So, being as I'm just generally new (haven't even posted my first character, though I'm pretty much ready to) I'll ask, for clarification;
Each player can only run any given scenario once, to get credit for it? Not character, but player?
If so, I /can/ rather see how that would make it difficult for some people to have multiple characters. Especially people like me who get 'alt-itis' =P
Mostly correct.
Each player may only get credit once from PLAYING the scenarios.
Each player may get credit once from GMing the scenario. Making a maximum of 2 chronicle sheets per player, per scenario.
|
|
Not common. Extremely rare, if at all. Probably just a rumor.
As of today (5/20/2013) there are:
127 scenarios, not counting the retired ones from season 0 (136 counting them)
(EDIT: remember the Exclusives are converted into regular scenarios in the following season and should only be counted once)
2 Quests
25 Sanctioned Modules, including the 5 part Thornkeep (so 29 actually)
16 Sanctioned Adventure Path segments
with more on the way every month.
Going from Don's numbers, that means there are
127 X 1 XP
29 X 3 XP = 87 XP
16 X 3 XP = 48 XP
So, just from playing you can earn 262 XP. Divide that by 33 and that's nearly enough to retire 8 characters. Add in judge credit and you can double that. Granted the math doesn't work perfectly since a few of the modules and adventure paths are level 12 and over, but I think it's a good approximation.
Edited to add: It might be slightly less because I am not sure Don's module numbers cover the 1 XP ones. However, don't forget that there are several level 1 modules that can be replayed as well as First Steps.
|
|
Yes, the Sanctioned Module numbers included the 3 Free RPG Day modules.
So it's 256 XP (not 262 XP).
Also, you would need to check the number of scenarios in each Tier to verify that there are enough continuous paths for 6 or 7 characters to "retire". Even if it's more like 5 characters played and 5 GM'd ... that's a lot of characters going to level 12.
And there needs to be some extra Tier 1-5 scenarios to account for low level characters who die without coming back as those adventures would no longer contribute to a player's level 12 career track.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
I wish you guys would post this stuff in this thread. /-:
It's all awesomely relevant to that conversation, even if the sanctioned module and AP numbers skew things off what I was pointing towards...
|
|
I wish you guys would post this stuff in this thread. /-:
It's all awesomely relevant to that conversation, even if the sanctioned module and AP numbers skew things off what I was pointing towards...
Drogon, rather than put a link to that thread here, why not just post a link to this thread, there?
|
|
Also, you would need to check the number of scenarios in each Tier to verify that there are enough continuous paths for 6 or 7 characters to "retire". Even if it's more like 5 characters played and 5 GM'd ... that's a lot of characters going to level 12.
And there needs to be some extra Tier 1-5 scenarios to account for low level characters who die without coming back as those adventures would no longer contribute to a player's level 12 career track.
This was on my list to do (break down by scenario level) eventually but I've got lots of homework due this week so was going to wait until that got done :P It is an exercise I want to perform for multiple reasons - I think the complaints about not enough 1-5 scenarios might be due to failing to progress OUT of the 1-5 level range for various reasons. I have some thoughts on that I have been meaning to post as soon as I have time...
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
Drogon, rather than put a link to that thread here, why not just post a link to this thread, there?I wish you guys would post this stuff in this thread. /-:
It's all awesomely relevant to that conversation, even if the sanctioned module and AP numbers skew things off what I was pointing towards...
Fair point. I'll try to pick a good spot for it and see what happens.
|
|
Wait wait, characters max at level 12 in PFS?
Sorry if that's a total newb question, I'm just confused, and hadn't heard that rule before. If it's the case, I'm going to need to drastically alter my character concept. xD
PFS Scenarios end at level 12. Beyond that your PFS character may play some Sanctioned Modules and APs. There are a limited number of play opportunities for characters above level 11 however, so you can only advance maybe 2 or 3 characters this way, currently.
PFS characters used to retire when they hit level 12. There was one retirement arc, Eyes of Ten, but you didn't advance past level 12. Mike Brock opened up higher level advancement when he took over PFS.
|
|
Ahhh okay. So, really, I shouldn't plan my characters for long term stuff except in a very limited fashion? That's sort of a bummer, as the character I had planned was going to be a Magus/Cleric/Mystic Theurge, which requires some serious level commitment to come into their real power. =/
Yeah PFS isn't really a good place for late blooming builds (unless you can judge credit your character up past the slow early stages). Even though there is plenty of stuff to play past 12th level, much of it is hard to schedule/needs to be done at a home game.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All right so after looking up my list of scenarios I come up with the following:
34 1-5 scenarios
20 1-7 scenarios
12 3-7 scenarios
24 5-9 scenarios
32 7-11 scenarios
It's basically equal in terms of low vs high level scenarios, as you have approximately equal numbers of level 1-5 scenarios as level 5-11 scenarios plus 12 scenarios at 3-7.
This is just me quickly glancing through my scenario tracker so it shouldn't be taken as absolute gospel but the numbers should be close...
|
|
Excellent list Katie, thank you for compiling it :)
So I don't want to turn this thread into a "fix wealth by level" thread, BUT I would like to say that if the double exp method is used, it DOES stretch the scenario's a little further.
Also, the vast majority of permadeaths has to be in 1-5's, meaning they get eaten up pretty quickly. It's just another point on the "more 1-5s are needed, always".
|
|
I'm with people on more 1-5 scenarios per season, especially ones that fill a variety of roles and play styles. As it stands I know I'm trying to find people in my local area looking to run God's market so that my bounty hunting ranger can get the credit while at the same time I know I would prefer to have my bard run through the Blakros Matrimony if I can get the chance. I feel like the important thing is that we get a lot of variety in setting, theme, and difficulty ranging throughout the low tiers so that we can build a character around a certain theme (diplomat, dungeon crawler, investigator, arctic specialist, comedic relief, etc.) and be sure we can find missions that match to those criteria and have enough of them that we don't run out after a character or 2. For example my party just did Frostfur captives about a month ago and it was an absolute blast and I would love to do it again with my bounty hunting ranger as the humor and themes (extraction) feel right up his alley but I worry that there isn't another scenario quite like that at the low tiers that I could put him through.
|
|
doc, you're getting kind of spoilerific there, or edging it... I'm brand new to Pathfinder, and know nothing about the modules, and would like to keep it that way until I've actually played them. It seems you've either run them before, GM'd them before, or just read them before.
Instead of trying to build your character to fit the adventures, why not build characters that you want to play, and then rely on team mates to fill roles that you might not be the star on, and then be the star on others?
That is actually what I do. Every character I've built thus far has just been something I've wanted to play for a while (Cleric summoner, crossbowmen, primitive knife wielder, dispater worshipping dwarf who seeks to use Dispater's iron rulership of Dis as the perfect model to put his race back on top, etc.). Trust me it's actually pretty difficult to build a character to match every single adventure or adventure theme and be effective and considering that you have to start at 1st and build up with every one would be in most cases a waste of time.
Now back to the point, all I'm wanting is to make sure that their is not only a variety of mission types at the low levels but that we see those themes and varieties in more then just one single scenario, that way players don't have to worry about playing the scenario through with a different character then the one they might want to play it through with for whatever reason (mismatched levels, bad team comp, etc.) and missing out on their only chance to actually play that type of scenario.
As an example lets say I have 2 characters, one is a big 2-handed weapon wielding barbarian pirate that I play when I just want to smash things to bits and do pirate stuff. The other character though is an inquisitor detective of zohls, tasked with investigating crimes and figuring out the ins and outs of the criminal mind and usually functions as face while being and is meant to be a bit more rp heavy. Second lets say for the sake of argument I started said barbarian first and he's now about level 4 while Zohls is like 1-2. Now lets say one day I sit down at the table and my gm drops us into a game that's going to be a super beat stick game on the high seas, we get a boat, their will be sharks to punch, pirates to kick overboard, the whole 9 but unfortunately everyone at my table has freshly minted 1st level characters. Now I could run Smash Krom the barbarian and have a grand old time but there's a good chance it will force the rest of my table to play up, a task most of them are probably not equipped to deal with and on top of that will cause most of that spot-light as well as responsibility to keep everyone alive to fall on me so the only right thing to do would be to play with my inquisitor to Zohls. Problem is I'm worried that if I do I might not see that pirate or ship themed content again until who's knows when and I've been itching to play out being captain of my own ship.
This is the problem that I worry happens a lot, that we end up in a situation where due to the scarcity of certain kinds of modules we end up having to chose between doing what is right for the rest of the party and doing what would be right for us as a player and considering that pfs is built to be drop in/drop out where we may not know who or what we are playing with so we might as well build the characters we really want to play, that choice can really be difficult sometimes.